You mention San Fran, Bengals and Seattle which one of them played in the SB last year? Hell we even beat Seattle.
You're right.
Bengals played in one last year, and San Fran a few years before that...STILL using a rushing attack featuring RBZ.
Last year's SB champs featured it as well.
But, thanks for pointing that out.
Look man, don't make this so complicated
I'm not. You wanted the reason to my answer (which you claimed you already knew, but conveniently won't give when asked).
So, again, you said this:
why did you make the assertion that the new blocking scheme has already proved that it will produce better results when you have absolutely no empirical evidence to make that judgment? I know why, do you?
Look man, don't make this so complicated
I'm not. You wanted the reason to my answer (which you claimed you already knew, but conveniently won't give when asked).
So, again, you said this:
why did you make the assertion that the new blocking scheme has already proved that it will produce better results when you have absolutely no empirical evidence to make that judgment? I know why, do you?
Like I originally stated, if we don't fix the personnel problems on the right side of our OL ( the Jimmy's and Joe's) the scheme won't even matter. Football games are won in the trenches. You don't seem to understand that!!!!!!
Look man, don't make this so complicated. I'm not arguing whether a zone or a power scheme is going to be more productive here . My point is: we don't have a large enough sample size or enough empirical evidence to make a judgement on it's effectiveness here in Tampa yet. Is that too hard for you to understand?But I've pretty much got you figured out. Again a very simple question: Do you know why?
The fact that the overwhelming majority of the best rushing attacks in the modern NFL feature or are heavily predicated on ZBS. Shanny, back in with Denver in the 90's/early 2000's when they laughed at the "It's the Jimmy's and Joes and not the X's and O's" dinosaur mentality and became a factory for 1K rushers.
Look at last season with San Fran, Bengals, Seattle, among others. All elite rushing attacks that feature ZBS.
Even in the preseason game, you saw runs coming out of different formations, different personnel groupings, etc. Different lanes were open, different gaps, stuff we haven't seen before.
Not to mention, our very own RB1 flourished in this type of system in college.
So, that's why I feel that I've already seen enough to say what I have.
NOW, let's hear your answer.
your point is that there should be no predictions here?
First time on the Red Board?
Don't care to even open that can of worms. You'd never admit it anyway, But believe me I know.
You already did, sir.
So, please, enlighten us since you're so adamant about knowing.
I mean, you are so bold with it, why shrivel up now when confronted?
your point is that there should be no predictions here?
First time on the Red Board?
Odd of him to be against predictions.
I mean, he once predicted at the end of the 2014 season that he "was going to laugh his ass off when Lovie took the 2015 team to the playoffs".
Weird...
Did I miss where the little bitch accepted the proposed bet?
One of the most interesting facets of this season revolves around Canales and how his offense will operate. Little doubt it will be better than last year's offense. There is an article from PR on the 1st game offense and it ends with this:
"Most of what we saw tracks with the hypotheses we had about Dave Canales. There was a lot of multiple tight end packages. Though it might not be the most efficient use of resources for the Bucs. They ran more on first down than last year, which does not track with the offense Canales helped run last year. But when the Bucs did pass they made sure it was in a way that is most advantageous to them. Well, two out of three ain’t bad."
First down runs in a pre-season game probably do not tell us much, but the part in bold is the interesting part and tracks to the posts here when Canales was hired. In short, is Canales a "Pete Carroll OC" or is he a "Waldron/McVey OC". One clue is that cin the PR article Canales uses the exact same language as McVey to discuss first down tendencies, comments that come from McVey (below) AFTER the Rams uncharacteristically went heavy 12 and 13 personnel for a couple games:
"“The coaches and the opposing teams that were playing, they know that’s (11 personnel) been something we’ve used a lot more. But last night, in terms of just the way that the percentage is, in terms of how heavy it was 12 personnel, those numbers sometimes get skewed too,” McVay said. “It really matters, what I mentioned earlier, that you’re going to be in 11 in a lot of the known-passing situations, third downs, and some of the second-and-longs. What’s really a good reflection is what type of personnel groupings are you activating in the normal down-and-distances – first and second downs?"
also, lots of 1st down runs by the Bucs new offense.
hmmm…
First down runs in a pre-season game probably do not tell us much
FFS...
Keep scouring the net, dumbass. It's done amazing things for your football acumen.
By the way, what did that same article say about play action?
Especially as it relates to last season and with our last QB?
also, lots of 1st down runs by the Bucs new offense.
hmmm…
First down runs in a pre-season game probably do not tell us much
FFS...
Keep scouring the net, dumbass. It's done amazing things for your football acumen.
"football acumen". lmao
somebody is proud of you . . maybe
By the way, what did that same article say about play action?
Especially as it relates to last season and with our last QB?
Yes, that is one thing that will definitely change no matter which side Canales emulates
Interested to see it play out. I don't follow Seahawk football, but they got better production from their TEs. I don't think we have the talent at TE for the heavy 12/13 model. We have 3 strong receivers though.
I don't follow Seahawk football
You've already proven that:
Carroll-style offense would drive some of the fans here nuts
Hell, you barely follow the Buccaneers and your takes are equally as bad. Simply put, you don't know what you are talking about. It's why you have to constantly scour the internet to try to back-up your dumbass takes.
I don't follow Seahawk football
You've already proven that:
Carroll-style offense would drive some of the fans here nuts
Hell, you barely follow the Buccaneers and your takes are equally as bad. Simply put, you don't know what you are talking about. It's why you have to constantly scour the internet to try to back-up your dumbass takes.
You mean posting information from the Internet that says you are you wrong or . . . worse . .DISHONEST? Like that time you said you were AGAINST the Payroll Protection Plan . . . without thinking (shocker) that THE TRUTH is public information? :-)
Buggsy, you don't have to follow Seahawks football to KNOW that Carroll's offense drives Seahawk fans AND PLAYERS nuts. Thats why its so funny to see you "flex" your supposed "football acumen" by referring to Waldron's Seahawks offense. Anyone with an OUNCE of "football acumen" -- even a JV-level failed o-lineman - would know that Waldron's HIRING (he never met Carroll before he was hired) and his offense was THE PRODUCT of that frustration with Carroll boiling over, inclufing with a famous former Seattle QB:
"Five things we learned from new Seahawks offensive coordinator Shane Waldron . . .
. . .When taken in totality, the comments (by Russell Wilson) suggest a more open offense could finally be making its way to Seattle, which should make Wilson happy -- at least until the Seahawks lose a close game and Pete Carroll insists "getting back go the rushing attack" will cure all ills."
That, my Lilliputian friend, is why I posted earlier that one interesting facet of this years Bucs is whether Canales is more Carroll or Waldron.
Catch up . . . oh wait . . .
